i believe it should be 2 people from our organization one person from san francisco that knows the rfp process selection process, and two people if outside that have hedge fund experience say we pull someone out of calpers and cal conspiracies i don't need to know their names that will draw an additional level of expertise we don't have now. >> i'll say the outside san francisco agency i'm fine to look for someone they need to have the selection but the selection and the evaluation of hedge fund products so i mean we could reach out no guarantee there's another city employee that has that experience or expertise. >> when i say city employee i'll broadened it and say maybe another county person like an example not san francisco but go to san mateo or la or controllers or treasurers i'm looking for someone that has basically know how the ratings go rather than someone of a less caliber person. >> you're saying another public employee if you can't find a san francisco pre. >> so i'm not. >> i think - i have someone that someone was in mind as possible and please don't share their name i'm

. >> thank you let me go in the order that the rfp that will be the easy to follow the introduction is fine page 3 under point c the performance benchmark duties the first believability to provide the implementation i'd like to have with and without leverage since we all know that hedge fund have more leverage so without leverage and with leverage to see the effect that will be the make sense so that is on page 3 moving on to page 4 for d. >> can i have a question. >> that's not practical is it hannah. >> that was going to be the question talking about the the evidence will then show of fund to fund or the underlying hedge fund. >> the question flying would be the best because of individual managers i think it or you should adjust for risk it has a 2 to 1 leverage i want o an apples to apples comparison so with and without leverage. >> it will be challenging depended on the strategy because of the derivatives i think it will be easy to get that but for credit manager you can add that and be part of the evaluation. >> that's what i'm suggesting with and without leverage .2 c adjusted fo

the rfp to gain the sweet of fund to fund and both direct. >> will you be asking responses. >> will you be asking for responses to both or pick one or the other? >> i envision one rfp but inviting both profiles of candidates to submit is that helpful. >> so we can expect to see both with a recommendation. >> whichever you choose. >> yes. >> i'm sorry commissioner. >> no, no that's fine the driving point for me this is not what i see this is based on the material here so just a reiterate you stated your approach to get guidelines at the same time having a staff to enhance where you are today you have great staff but adding to that and issuing an rfp. >> the first to issue an rfp okay that will take sometime we would also conduct a search for staff those two will go on simultaneously and probably come to an end at the same time when they're in place together the three of us meaning you know the external party and internal hire will present the guidelines the guidelines will be 6 months away. >> so we're talking 2016 almost. >> 2018. >> the infrastructure will be the - are you asking when

stansbury not to make the motion now until all the commissioners have an opportunity to speak to the rfp then we extend that courtesy of the calendar item to every person the only person that hadn't said where they're at is me i think we should start with fund to fund we don't have the staff to do in house and the officers are right not asking us almost asking us to declare our position which troubling it is the right and he's chosen not to that's the absolute right to put on calendar and asking question us so why wouldn't you ask that question direct mr. coker. >> commissioner i'd like to have certainty that we will recruit successfully for this position to critical hire and that in the absence of that we'll have a fund inform to fund solution at this time i'd like to survey the entire landscape of the investment opportunities increasing fund to fund managers are the world's are converging between fund to fund managers and the hedge fund consultants what used to be the one and 10-month-old for hedge funds managers excuse me. hedge funds manager is now pretty much close to zero and 75 po

, if you put in your rfp and you say that two positions are to be unbilled for the operations position and the account manager, it should be spelled out correctly. what the rfp had said in your mark-up, you're only to focus on the guards and then all of the other additional employees, other positions are to be included in the actual mark-up, so the issues that we have at andrews international is when i look at as i receive the letter from mr. patel he states those two positions should not have been billed, then why sit on cypress', as i look at their contract, the two of the positions are listed. the badging clerk and then also the ada, so i ask this board to consider the facts that are rfp was not written correctly and that we studied it, we put our information together. if you say to us that 6 positions that they have here are not supposed to be billed, this is on their rfp and then you turn around and let cypress security do this, it's a big problem. i ask the board to really consider this and i ask the board to call for a special investigation. >> thank you, thank you. >> brad lowe

part of the rfp needs to address the rural coverage and the folks responding to the rfp need to respond and how they plan to do that. >> of course the paradox here is some of those areas are in the greatest need of telecommunications. >> we understand which is why we are making it up ready. >> as i understand and also maybe ms. swanson the governor of each state would have the option to accept or opt out of the firstnet plan. i'm not hearing that montana is planning to opt out but i know there was curiosity rounded the governor did opt out of the plan they are responsible for coordinating and submitting a plan to the fcc. and a sense of what the costs associated with opting out versus accepting the plan for some of the states might be? >> it's a great question and i think a lot of people are trying to figure that out. i think it's important to understand you are not opting out of the nationwide network. you are assuming responsibility for building your own radio access network. all states where do do you use radio access network or builder on will connect our national core. that is what

. >> the first to issue an rfp okay that will take sometime we would also conduct a search for staff those two will go on simultaneously and probably come to an end at the same time when they're in place together the three of us meaning you know the external party and internal hire will present the guidelines the guidelines will be 6 months away. >> so we're talking 2016 almost. >> 2018. >> the infrastructure will be the - are you asking when the first investment will happen. >> kind of a benchmark. >> i'm going to throw out guess around december fwith 2015 maybe march 21st 2016. >> no, i'm good. >> great so mr. cokeer when i come back with the rfp with the end result you'll have the privilege of looking a direct program of fund to fund and a customized program in the responses from the rfp the way you envision it. >> yes. >> will that same will all of that be brought to the commission to look at it in two's or one recommendations to the board. >> at the discretion of the board i prefer the policy and jay you may state what the policy but i'll do whatever the discretion of board do y

you mentioned you will try to rfp by the end of the month >> the draft rfp. if i could i would like to talk about the fact we said we are on track with everything we said we would do. issued public notice and comment on monday and by the end of the month the board is going to consider the draft rfp forissue issue. vendors wants tonight what we intend and it provides the vendors to give us feedback about how the draft rfp is issued so when we issue the final one toward the latter part of the calendar here there is no unintended consequences because he didn't take it into consideration. we are on track to issue that and with all of the mile stones we communicated over a year ago. and you think end of the calendar year final rfp. >> that is what i believe today. >> are there factors that could delay that >> i am not aware of that. but depending on the comments from the vendors we get back on the draft it might extend it a little but i think it will be worth the time so when we issue the rfp it is done right and as you indicated the rfp is the pivotal part of thi

the badging clerk and then also the ada, so i ask this board to consider the facts that are rfp was not written correctly and that we studied it, we put our information together. if you say to us that 6 positions that they have here are not supposed to be billed, this is on their rfp and then you turn around and let cypress security do this, it's a big problem. i ask the board to really consider this and i ask the board to call for a special investigation. >> thank you, thank you. >> brad lower. >> good afternoon, my name's brad lower as peter stated, when we bid on the security program, we were selected as the top bidder and entered in negotiations in good faith. however, we have some concerns with how the negotiations were handled as well as the response we received dated march 16th in response to our letter of protest about the award of security services, i want to focus on the inconsistencies as peter brought up, one in the rfp, it was clearly stated on page [inaudible] services that these two positions, account manager and operations manager were considered part of the rfp process.

you mentioned you will try to rfp by the end of the month >> the draft rfp. if i could i would like to talk about the fact we said we are on track with everything we said we would do. issued public notice and comment on monday and by the end of the month the board is going to consider the draft rfp forissue issue. vendors wants tonight what we intend and it provides the vendors to give us feedback about how the draft rfp is issued so when we issue the final one toward the latter part of the calendar here there is no unintended consequences because he didn't take it into consideration. we are on track to issue that and with all of the mile stones we communicated over a year ago. and you think end of the calendar year final rfp. >> that is what i believe today. >> are there factors that could delay that >> i am not aware of that. but depending on the comments from the vendors we get back on the draft it might extend it a little but i think it will be worth the time so when we issue the rfp it is done right and as you indicated the rfp is the pivotal part of thi

. >> so we're learning the rfp was it going to be 75 percent for the privilege and 85 for the sub and then how much of 75 percent is going to work in a filling randolph. >> thirty percent told is going to the subcontractors and it is i believe a 20 10 split with the loosening street youth. >> okay. so the thirty, 24, 45 percent that's left where do most of those kids come from all over san francisco bay area or just - >> you want to address that. >> i will say those are rough numbers but so 40 percent of population comes from bayview hunters point the next tier is western edition after that tenderloin public school the mission district and just a combination of other. >> okay. >> i just want to add that because of the conservation core works that the 18 and old they were to serve the youth so we have 15 and 16-year-old plants that participate in the program the budget was not huge we served a number of kids to introduce them to the work so conservation core could be another step but after programs they were working with the city. >> i guess my concern has always been the money that go

process to make sure our rfp was responsible responsive to federal regulation in october of 2014 the fcc indicated through lob a ceiling at $0.21 for prepaid and 20 important collect calls they'll lloyd like to eliminate the surcharge fees the intent behind this to lower the fees to the inmates can have a lower amount and reduce the recidivism so in that 3 month enter eloquently process that was on hold we issued in december and our rfp district attorney meet the requirements of fcc in light intervening period the sheriff's went to washington, d.c. to mediate meet with the commissioners and talk about his position regarding inmate calling rates as you recall we drastically increased the call rates and reduce the inmate calling rates by 20 percent under the sheriff's discretion kind of opened by the indication of the fcc they were willing to negotiate the rates we went further it is important for the access to have the telephone and maintain the support so the message to washington, d.c. overall the department supports the fcc action regarding the calling rates but speaking on behalf

. >> have your clients ever included you from the rfp process in evaluating applicants. >> no it is part of our contract we would include the hedge fund to fund and candidate review process but not the hedge fund process that is a different amen we considered it i guess we graded i guess only the last contract 8 years ago it was included point scope of services. >> but not direct. >> not direct. >> can you say that 8 years ago the hedge fund was in your contract. >> we had two extensions and i think our last contract. >> 2008 but again the listing of activities that we're expecting were basically at the discretion of the hedge funds. >> right. >> anything else yes, thank you. >> as i go down the list first of all, off what we're talking about here is minimum qualifications not necessarily desirable contributes they're coming after you receive the applications so what we're talking about is the process so we're clear i didn't necessarily object to everyone's concerns but changing it up front to get a desirable outcome i think that is better to get more information now going down the list

. >> will that be part of the rfp selection. >> yes. >> if not here you'll have it in rfp. >> yes, that's correct. >> and then will this have any environmental review on the community in any way. >> we'll ask for best best practices and say we want to mitigate against dust and they'll be required to you know go through the usual regulatory processes for storment and provide the impacts vision and how they're to mitigate against those impacts we'll be sensitive to those types of mitigations. >> thank you very much i'm really excited about this project and hopefully we'll get a lot of good proposals. >> i hope so. >> thank you. >> commissioner murphy well, i assumed the raw material comes in on a ship a little bit of. >> other things happening in between. >> so there will be no process. >> no some processing done at the pine sites some concentration of the material to the right concentration of ore they'll want to have a moisture content not too much moisture and we envision it having covered storage with that said, actually was the main mining company we're working with nevada iron with th

first on vision zero and secondly on the rfp for naming rights and stuff like that. i was not able to stay for the whole meeting and so vice chairman provided me for second points. i thank scott for bringing it here so i can see it. in terms of vision zero, we were very grateful to scott and staff for scheduling vision zero to speak to us on the agenda. because bruce and i sit over that committee and had requested it. megan, we and mary hunter presented it to us and you may wish to present a similar presentation before you. vision zero as you know is city policies adopted by 13 agencies of the city. and ed reiskin is one of the, director of one of those agencies that manages the director of department of public health. i would like to mention to you that this is a 10-year plan of course to reduce traffic incidents to zero whether they be motorist. the number of reporting traffic incidents. 17 pedestrians, 9 motorist, 3 bicyclist. the second point was high injury streets. 12 percent of all san francisco streets are upon for 70 percent of the total crashes. we is that

it has to be done very well and i don't know if rfp maybe isn't necessarily the way to start. i don't know, i have never done it and we are doing it in the brp and oakland. that is a much smaller scale. but we already had targets. we knew that kaiser was one that we really wanted and we have been working with them for several years and see if we can nail that. there are other comparable things like that. i think the one thing that i would holdback on because i think it would be to our advantage is the wifi sponsorship. the reason being is the public's attitude towards the wifi they expect changes about every 6 weeks in terms of, i remember an initial. just a few years ago you couldn't get wifi unless you signed up for so many months and they would bill you and people don't tolerate that anymore. so, and apps can be constructed very fast. so almost, we are going to build a wifi network that's fine, but it could be anything from ours, but we want it sponsored. the nature of what passengers will accept for a place like that for getting wifi will change in the next 2 years. it's m

you sit down june 9 they tell you what they think you put together an rfp. is there another effort to see what you are working on to make sure their views are reflected? >> thank you for the question because i want to emphasize that consultation is a broad and ongoing process, not a one-time event. we talk a lot about state consultation, and it is important people understand. our relationship with the states is ongoing. we have conference calls, are, are available by staff, e-mails face-to-face meetings. also i would tell you that as we go through the process of consultation rfp and delivering a plan teach governor for the plan for their state, that will not be a surprise. we want this to be an iterative collaborative process so that when you get that plan you have been so involved in it there are no surprises. that is the mindset we have around the process. it is important that we work together, and we have been somewhat limited on staff but are adding people to make sure we have the right number to be available to you and your team. >> and one of the thing

the response to the rfp will be critical and the folks who responded to rfp will have to address those issues. that's what we're taking information from your state consultation and interaction were having with your state and put it into the rfp so whoever is responding knows that's a priority for your spent on from your point of view there's no place in the country that has been labeled as taken off the table? >> no. knothole. we talked problem more rural than urban. that's so important it is to us is we're constantly thinking about and making sure, and i would commend you if you haven't seen and for anybody was listening, the second notice really assures that. we took great pains and spent quite a bit of time to picture the very situation you describe will not happen your. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator gardner, and i appreciate the continued emphasis on the rural issues. ms. swenson, i'm sure you got that loudly and clergy but a lot of interest on this committee. >> i feel the same way. >> this has been a great panel. i thought this shed a lot of light o

part of the rfp needs to address the rural coverage and the folks responding to the rfp need to respond and how they plan to do that. >> of course the paradox here is some of those areas are in the greatest need of telecommunications. >> we understand which is why we are making it up ready. >> as i understand and also maybe ms. swanson the governor of each state would have the option to accept or opt out of the firstnet plan. i'm not hearing that montana is planning to opt out but i know there was curiosity rounded the governor did opt out of the plan they are responsible for coordinating and submitting a plan to the fcc. and a sense of what the costs associated with opting out versus accepting the plan for some of the states might be? >> it's a great question and i think a lot of people are trying to figure that out. i think it's important to understand you are not opting out of the nationwide network. you are assuming responsibility for building your own radio access network. all states where do do you use radio access network or builder on will connect our national core. that is what

part of the rfp needs to address the rural coverage and the folks respond ing responding to the rfp need to respond on how they plan to do that. >> of course, the paradox is some of those areas are in the greatest need of telecommunications telecommunications. >> which is why we're making it a priority. >> as i understand also, the gov governor of each state would have the option to accept or opt out of the firstnet plan. i'm not hearing that montana is planning to opt out, but there was curiosity if a governor did opt out they are responsible for coordinating an effort and submitting that plan to the fcc. any sense of what the costs associated with opting out versus accepting the plan for some of the states might be? >> well, i think that's -- it's a great. question. it's important to understand that you're not really opting out of the nationwide network. you're really assuming responsibility for building your own radio access network. all states, whether they use firstnet's network or build their own, will connect to our national core. that's what creates the interoperability across th

and you'll know exactly what's included to give the direction when ou want in that rfp not that you wait to see what is in there or someone else decided that is because you ultimately made the dignities so you should give it direction and the other thing your talking about the guidelines and what you there are many questions earlier about the guidelines and maybe those will be you can in the next process down the road you need to set the guidelines and vote on the funds fund manager and all the areas you need to establish the good morning, supervisors before i go further otherwise what's in the rfp and whater people sitting on it is this and that or how is that if you don't set the guidelines up front and let us all know including the staff where your km from and the minimum standards you expect how can you go forward so it's the tail wagging the dog you don't see the basically ethic bask set forward first before you vote it's all over the place you may not want that to be part find our motion i understand that but unless you set the guidelines and standards and give directions i do

>> the draft rfp. let me clarify that. it's really important, if i could, senator i'd like to just talk about the fact that as i said, we're on track with everything we said we were going to do in our strategic road map. as i said we issued the public notice and comment on monday and by the end of this month the board is going to consider the draft rfp for issuance. the reason it's important to put a draft rfp out in the community is the very thing you said. vendors want to know what we're intending, and it provides the opportunity for the vendors to give us feedback about how that draft rfp is actually issued. so that when we issue the final rfp towards the latter part of the calendar year, we won't experience unintended consequences, because of -- because we didn't take that into consideration. so we are on track to issue that. and like i said, we're on track with all the mile stones that we communicated over a year ago. >> and you think end of the calendar year, final rfp? >> that's what i believe today. >> are there fa

on march 3 there were three firms that responded to the rfp. proposals were directed for lump sum of design services, construction fee percentage and construction overhead percentage. proposals were evaluated on a 850 point system and 500 points or 59% weighted for the price of the construction and 41% weighted on the criteria for qualifications, financial strength, experience as well as safety records. for the purpose of determining the proposed price the construction fee percentage and the construction overhead percentage were multiplied by [inaudible] construction costs. southwest specialty contractors scored the highest and the other two firms had less points. >> >> the total cost for the sealing based on the southwest specialty contractors proposal is 26 million and [inaudible] for the construction costs and 4.8 for the describe service and construction see and overhead. the total estimated costs on the proposal is [inaudible] and the total [inaudible] construction costs on [inaudible] proposals is $25 million. the estimate for the total c

and the board is on track to address the draft rfp later this month. we have had outreach meetings since the beginning cuonnectconnecting first net with stakeholders. we scheduled meetings with an additional 28 states and held a variety of forms beyond this meetings with single points of contact in the state with week leo mails, monthly phone calls quarterly webinars and upcoming on april 14th and 15 we will host an inperson meeting where we are going to have 56 states andsial point of contacts attending if they can make it. i am very proud of the organization and what it has accomplished and where they are in terms of readiness. it is a dedicated and committed team working on a project that faces head winds each and every day. what no one sees is the toll thes this takes on the organization and the people working in it. at first net we are taking on this task to deploy a nationwide network and we are constrained by a number of factors that are out of our control. coming from the private sector i have found the federal rules and processes challenging a

so we're necessarily know what's in that number. >> so how can we do that without going out with an rfp. >> the theme we've talked about not to exceed price until we actually went on the market like for example, we may want to explain with when we had shell; right? you want to - >> with shelf we were dealing with indicative prices even under the shell there of the uncertainty to the final rates of pricing we'll have to strict a quick integral to sfichl up the rates the intent of during that period of time not to exceed rate. >> so we've always had a not to exceed rate and when we went to shell they would give us pricing if it was lower than the not to exceed we could move forward but if it went over this we'll tell shelf to go back that's the purpose of the not to exceed rate. >> so what is purpose of it now. >> it is the same thing we have to go on the market to do the rfps to get what the rate would be it's the same things we don't have shell to do it we have 80 do it ourselves. >> okay. >> sorry about that. >> (laughter). no problem at all it is great to go last everything has been s

. >> the first to issue an rfp okay that will take sometime we would

process to make sure our rfp was responsible responsive to federal regulation in october of

the place and people buena vista to the presidio i'd like to request that you guys come back in an rfp and talk about how this is be structured sometimes, it benefits the districts and this is challenging to say that is a great thing when i look at two locations and ton of kids in the district i'd like to see this come back next month. >> thanks supervisor breed. >> thank you so i royals this is just an extension for a couple of months until you award a new contract but i still have a problems are the cost we're talking about over $5,000 per classes based on my calculations and bans the number of people $200 per person and so i'm concerned about the expense i know there are pamphlets and bikes i mean a number of things but evolving their startup costs and continued costs that should decrease in terms of the number so i agree with supervisor christensen on the need to do a better job to get more participation in the classes ultimately the point of those classes to provide safety to the public and so that people are biking save and learning about the rules of the road so we can keep them

on december 2nd, we received four proposals all of them at the rfp's minimum qualifications and established a strong panel with over 4 years of experience with the san francisco and department of finance for the proposals. the panel overwhelmly scored pfm as the strong firm. highlighted pf m qualified staff including budget director under mayor feinstein and identified work samples as being strong and came in with 30% lbe subcontracting goal and used minority owned firm to meet the subcontracting goal. on january 22nd, we issued a notice of intent to award the contract. the alleged contractor with the local office here in san francisco. they have substantial seaport experience and worked with the ports of los angeles, tacoma and portland. as i mentioned committed to a 30% lbe utilization goal. they currently serve as the control of financial advisor, work with san francisco airport, mta and puc and work with the port since 2009. >> thank you, eileen, deputy director. we are retaining financial advisor primarily we've used heavily for bond sales. while we don't anticipate selling revenue bon